by NotFormer 17 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
My understanding* is that the UN is supposed to be the wild beast of Revelation. The UN only came into being after WWII, so what was the beast before the new light came about? I can't see a speculative organisation like the WT not having an interpretation of the beast before the UN came into being. Even if it was the League of Nations, that came into being after WWII. What was Russell's take on the beast?
*Subject to loving correction, of course! đ¸
I always thought the beast was the League of Nations before, this then became the UN? They teach it only came into existence in the last days so I guess 1914 again
I actually wrote WWI for the league of nations, but it seems my idiot tablet autocorrected it! đ
ExBethelitenowPIMA, if the league of nations was formed in 1919, then that would be an interesting counterpoint to their love of that date. But I just looked it up, League of Nations was formed in 1920, presumably after Satan knew his time was short with the appointment of the FDS! đđ¤Ž
Man, the ego on Rutherford!
Russell died in 1916, so he wouldn't have had the then non-existent League of Nations in mind. Who or what did he think was the beast? I've been googling it, but most of the answers are about JWs, not bible students before Rutherford.
Watchtower 1882, january-february: https://www.a2z.org/wtarchive/docs/1882_Watch_Tower.pdf
THE
IMAGE OF THE BEAST.
"Saying to them that dwell on the earth [independent companies of Christians] that they should make an IMAGE TO THE BEAST [Papacy], which had the wound by a sword and did live. "She advised this by her example. From the year 1800 to 1846 was a time in which great numbers of new sects arose, whereas before that they were few and prominent. This gave rise to uneasiness among the various older denominations, who wondered whereunto this thing would lead. As the Bible came to be read more and more by the masses, occasional individuals would feel free to preach what they thought it taught, regardless of denominational creeds and the views of older sects. As a consequence Protestants were fast splitting up into fragments. They began to say, By what means shall we check and stop this disposition to individual thought and opinion relative to the teachings of Scripture? They wanted to stop the very thing God desired, viz. : that each individual should be free and independent of restraint, with his faith based, not on the views of others, not on the decisions of councils or presbyteries, nor in the decision of the Pope, nor in the things approved of the HEAD of the English Church, but in the WORD OF GOD.
The question came--How can we restrain these preachers? This was a quandary to all except the Roman and Episcopal Churches, since these both claimed the "Apostolic Succession," and that this by ordination, conferred upon their ministers special power and authority to preach and to administer the "Sacraments"; hence that no others had a right to do so, but were clerical pretenders. Other denominations could not claim this continuation of apostolic power through their preachers, but simply set them apart by prayer, consequently those of one denomination could not object, that the preachers of other denominations, as well as all laymen, were not as truly authorized of God to expound the Scriptures as their own clergy.
But the example of the church of England showed what a prestige she had by reason of the voice of authority with which she commanded a reverence for her clergy and her teachings. This teaching by example was not lost. The various denominations felt a necessity for some common STANDARD OF DOCTRINE which would be supported and upheld by all of them, and thus give prestige to their teachings, and bring the combined influence of all, AGAINST ANY FURTHER ADVANCE IN KNOWLEDGE or the development of any different phase of TRUTH. Thus they would protect themselves by being able to say--The combined opinion of all Protestants is against you; therefore you are HERETICS, and therefore we will shun you, and not call you brethren, but use all our influence against you.
This was done by the formation in 1846, of the "Evangelical Alliance. " It was stated to be one of the objects of the Alliance (and we believe the principal one) to "Promote between the different EVANGELICAL denominations, an effective cooperation in the efforts to REPEL COMMON ENEMIES and DANGERS.
B. I do not understand you to oppose the Christians represented in that alliance, but their attempt to muzzle truth, and to prevent the opening up of any other truths buried by Papacy, than those which they had received.
A. Quite right, it is far from my wish to say they purposely combined against the unfolding of truth, nor would I say this of Papists. But I do say, that by their action they were following Papacy's tactics, and that in that Alliance they did make, the-- IMAGE OF THE BEAST.
And they have been in great measure successful. Very few denominations have sprung up since that Alliance put its measuring line upon men's minds, to decide what was, and what was not Evangelical, regardless of whether it be Scriptural or not. It has tended to make a separation clear and distinct between Clergy and Laity, as though they were of different races.
How much the IMAGE resembles the Papal BEAST may be judged from the fact that Papacy acknowledged the image--owned it as a creditable likeness--by the Pope's sending "GREETINGS" to the last meeting of the "Ev. Alliance"--1879. Strange to say the delegates to the Alliance had so far lost sight of the principles and doctrines which led to the protests against the Papal church, (that it was the Harlot church--Anti-Christ and Man of sin, mentioned in Scripture) that they actually felt FLATTERED by the Pontiff's notice, instead of becoming alarmed and examining how and WHY he who is "THE (chief) Antichrist," should feel pleased to greet them as follows. A prominent Presbyterian minister present at the above named meeting, mentioned the "Pope's Greeting" with evident pleasure and satisfaction, to the writer.
A prominent characteristic of the BEAST copied by the image is the honoring of the special class, the clergy, with special honors and titles. They are known as Revs. , Divines, etc. , but Jesus THE divine, said: "Ye call me Lord and Master, and ye say well, for so I am. ""Be not ye called Rabbi, neither be ye called Master, for one is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren" (Matt. 23:8). These titles are assumptions fashioned after those of Papacy.
When the various denominations began their existence, more full of the spirit of Christ they claimed no such high sounding titles. The Reformers were not known as Rev. __________, D. D. , &c. , but as John Knox, Martin Luther, John Wesley, &c. Unpretentious, like Jesus and the Apostles, they were intent upon serving God and therefore became the servants (ministers) of the church. These had marks of God's approval, and as a result, their ministry was wonderfully blest. But now the clergy are far from being servants, they are Lords. They have itching ears, loving the approval of men. As pride and worldliness have come in, vital godliness and power have gradually departed.
For the very same reason, they are losing all power to expound the Word of God--the gift of teaching--because "God abhorreth the proud but giveth grace (favor) to the humble. "The early reformers were humble, and God led them into much knowledge of His Word, and although we are much farther along "the path of the just," and the servants should have
R322 : page 8
more light, yet we find ministers of all denominations ready to confess their ignorance of the Word. They appeal for their information, back to the early reformers, and thus confess that they have less light than they. Pride always has hindered growth in grace and does now. "How can ye believe who receive honor one of another, and seek not the honor which comes from God, only?" That their light should grow dim
R322 : page 9
and their spiritual life become dwarfed is the natural result of their joining the IMAGE and subscribing to creeds made in the fifteenth century, which, like the iron shoe of China, will not admit of any growth. It is a shoe a little larger than Papacy put upon its followers, but of the same sort.
Papacy established the clerical hierarchy, who lord it over God's heritage instead of serving their brethren as Jesus explained--"One is your Master and all ye are brethren," and as Paul said--We are to speak the truth in love and "grow up into Him in all things who is the head, even Christ; from whom the whole body fitly joined together (not by creeds of men, but by love begotten by the one Spirit of truth) and compacted by that which every joint supplieth. " (Every joint is every member, not the clergy only.)"Maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. "Thus coming "to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God. " Eph. 4:15,16.
As Papacy established the priesthood over the church, so Protestantism has established almost the same, and there is no opportunity for the body to edify itself, every joint taking part. True, there is a seeming show of liberty at prayer-meetings, etc. , but it is only upon the surface, for the ordained pastor is to watch zealously lest anything contrary to the teachings of his church should be expressed, and if so to silence the audacious member at once, for the church creed is the rule, not the Word of God. If this is not sufficient, they must have a sort of church trial and excommunicate him ["kill him"]. The trial, by the way, gives evidence of another likeness to the beast, namely, the exaltation of the teachings of the organization above the Word of God, for all such are tried according to "the authorities" of their church.
"And it was given him [the two horned beast] to give life to the image of the Beast. " (Vs. 15.)
It may not be known to many how much stress was laid upon the "Apostolic succession," which was supposed to be a virtue transmitted through hundreds of years of Papal corruption, by the laying on of the hands of Bishops. This, of course, was vested in the Roman church and also in the English church, on account of its being at first, rather a secession from Papacy, than a reformation.
To many minds, even among the clergy, there was a veneration for that ceremony, which neither Papacy nor the English Church were averse to promoting.
In the introduction of Methodism in the United States much difficulty was experienced because of Mr. John Wesley's superstition on this subject. He would not sanction the giving of the "Sacrament" by any except those ordained by the holy hands of an Episcopal Bishop. Thus up to 1784, Methodists could only partake of the Sacraments from Episcopal ministers (ordained). The independence war tended to make the Methodist preachers independent, and the expediency of taking the authority was discussed. John Wesley heard of this, and applied to the English Church to have at least one Methodist minister ordained for the American Church. Finally, in despair, he did the best he knew how to patch up an "apostolic succession. "He with two other ministers (none of them bishops) ordained Thomas Coke to the office of Bishop, and from this sprang the office of Bishop in the M. E. Church.
I relate this only to show the superstition of even so great and good men as the Wesleys, on this subject.
Now, none of these allied sects had the succession except the Episcopal, and its recognition of the Alliance (Image) gave it vitality--breath-- authority, "That the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the IMAGE OF THE BEAST, should be killed. " (Vs. 15.)
The worship and the killing are symbolic as well as the Image, and this signifies that all who will not bow to the decrees of the Evangelical Alliance shall be esteemed as heretics, shunned and cast out by all who are ORTHODOX, (?) i. e. , all who worship its decrees and agree to believe neither more nor less than is stated in its nine articles of creed. Now the various sects have a sort of backing in this organization, and each may act as the mouthpiece of the Image, in denouncing as heresy, all matter not included in this general creed, and in cutting off or ecclesiastically beheading those who differ. (See Rev. 20:4.)
B. I see, and to be cut off from any one church now, implies dismemberment from all orthodox churches; which implies of course, that you are a heretic, and not at all a son of God.
A. Yes, to all who regard these earthly institutions as the real churches; but to those of us who regard only the heavenly organization, and who look for the smile of the true Head of the church only, and who accept His Word as the only limitation of faith and knowledge; such cannot worship either the BEAST or his IMAGE, after they come to realize it, but will "worship God" only.
IMAGE worship is hindering hundreds from seeing the beauties of the Word of God. They may perhaps glance at it, and for a moment think for themselves, but that is all. The church discipline is so strict, and they reverence it so much, that a look or frown is sufficient to warn them that independent thought is a dangerous thing, and must not be indulged in, lest they be regarded as infidels. Would that all could see that these local organizations called churches are not THE CHURCH, but that the Church of God includes all Christians, all whose names are written in Heaven, and that when these local organizations attempt to come between them as children, and God their Father, or to put their creed instead of the Word of God, their assumed authority is not to be recognized, nor tolerated; and that it is our duty to rebuke it as sinful.
"And he causes all, the little [humble] and the great, the rich and the poor, and the freemen and bondmen, that they should give themselves a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead; so that no one may be able to buy or sell unless he who has the MARK-- the name of the beast or the number of his name. " (Vss. 16,17.)
All classes of Christians must bow; all must, in some way, give evidence of their support of the Image and consecration to its interests and laws; either a public, open profession of being members of the alliance, and hence supporters (mark in forehead) or at least a giving of some assistance and influence to the principles of Image organization--(the right hand support).
B. How about the buying and selling?
A. That, like the other features, is symbolic: The buying and selling, refers to dealing in spiritual things. None may be recognized as having any right to teach or preach or baptize or administer the emblems of our Lord's death, except those LICENSED to do so by some orthodox member of the Image. And acts of such persons are not counted valid.
B. Truly these things fit together wonderfully; nor should it surprise us that in giving an account of the church and its later times, all three of these great systems should be mentioned thus by our Lord. The English Church system is certainly a BEAST in the same sense as Papacy was, with the different characteristics noted; and the Evangelical Alliance is certainly a perfect IMAGE of it. It is what in politics or business would be termed a "ring"--a religious ring or monopoly, organized to hinder others from going into the work of truth seeking.
A. You will notice that this 17th verse indicates that the name is the mark--the name of the Beast or the number of his name. "The next verse seems to indicate, that this name and number are, in some sense, a secret, and that it will indicate wisdom, or a correct knowledge of the foregoing symbols, if we are able to solve the mystery of the name which is symbolically given as 666. "Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding [of the foregoing symbol, prove it by a proper application of the following number] compute the number of the Beast, for it is a man's number [or reckoned after a human manner]; and his number is 666.
I was after the tl:dr version, I seriously don't want to read that idiot's rantings. Is he saying the beast is the RC church and the Anglican church or the reformation churches or some sort of ecumenical council? Wouldn't that be the false prophet, the second beast?
WTC has a CO school they host on the east coast of FL. Currently they are covering changes in understanding (interpretation) of Revelation. I suspect that they feel the need to lighten up on the UN as the Image of the Wild Beast since they are again involved. Predictably, the Revelation book is out of print and a large part of what was previously studied is verboten now. I recall studying that publication 3 times.
Same here.
If you were to read it back nowadays, it would look and feel so dated and Cold War-centric, youâd be thinking âWTF?â even if you were still in.
Maybe thatâs why theyâre doing this thing in Florida (assuming they have anyone with the narrative chops to come up with something plausible in the Information Age).
ThomasMore - ââŚsuspect that they feel the need to lighten up on the UNâŚâ
Yeah, âspecially since in reality, itâs a lot less like Darth Sidiousâ Galactic Empire, and a lot more like Willy Wonkaâs Chocolate Factory.
đ
Vidiot, if only it was fun like that!
